PDA

View Full Version : 10-round fixed mag kit


Sundowner
12-30-2005, 9:50 AM
Sorry, I used the search function and still couldn't find this information. Some time back there was a discussion here about a 10-round fixed mag kit for AR-15 California legal rifles. Can someone please direct me to the website that manufactures/sells those kits? I had it bookmarked but lost it!

Sundowner
12-30-2005, 9:52 AM
Thanks, Ted! I appreciate it!

just4fun63
12-30-2005, 11:29 AM
10% firearms has kits and mags you can find him on this forum

morepoop4u
12-30-2005, 3:30 PM
Does anybody have it installed yet? I'm patiently waiting for my stags to come in hehe.

glock_this
12-30-2005, 4:13 PM
http://sportingconversions.com/

tt -

one of my quandary's to figure out for when I do it was, when people were removing their junky Pro mags from the Vulcan lower, what did they use to pin back a new mag? Literally? A cotter pin from Home Depot? what size? length? etc...

Seeing this option they offer, can I assume, in the case of the vulcan lowers, you use this kit to 'pin' back in your better after market mag?

glock_this
01-02-2006, 7:25 AM
bump

anyone know about this product?

tenpercentfirearms
01-06-2006, 10:50 PM
A good product. I installed mine and it worked great. I like that the nut is round so it is really hard to get a grip on it with your fingers so it really does require a tool to remove. Also if you wrench it down to tight, the mag release bolt pushes the allan wrench out of the nut and you can't losen it unless you use a set of pliars or something. It might not be worth $15, but they are nice. I would most certainly recommend the Sporting Conversions kit and a Bushmaster mag over the ar15plus.com kits. The ar15plus.com magazine makes baby Jesus cry.

shopkeep
01-06-2006, 11:38 PM
Not to mention the Bushmaster 10 round mags look awesome when installed into a fixed magazine rifle. That's why everyone with a Vulcan was doin' it with Bushmaster 10 rounds before these newer and less expensive .223 self loading rifle lowers came into the state.

morepoop4u
01-07-2006, 12:40 AM
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=8&f=11&t=219719

glock_this
01-07-2006, 8:39 AM
A good product. I installed mine and it worked great. I like that the nut is round so it is really hard to get a grip on it with your fingers so it really does require a tool to remove. Also if you wrench it down to tight, the mag release bolt pushes the allan wrench out of the nut and you can't losen it unless you use a set of pliars or something. It might not be worth $15, but they are nice. I would most certainly recommend the Sporting Conversions kit and a Bushmaster mag over the ar15plus.com kits. The ar15plus.com magazine makes baby Jesus cry.

So, here is what I am trying to understand about this/their product. this could not be considered a viable and CA legal 'pinning' option for your AR15 could it? The reason I thought not is that it would allow you to quickly (with the turn of a hex wrench) remove the mag versus something like the Vulcan lower that is pinned and glued in. Also, if someone like Vulcan has to have their lower approved by the DOJ as CA legal, how could you just go and get this product and just do it yourself? So, if it is not a viable option to make a CA legal lower using this product why would you even use it? What am I missing about this?

bwiese
01-07-2006, 12:20 PM
So, here is what I am trying to understand about this/their product. this could not be considered a viable and CA legal 'pinning' option for your AR15 could it?

The reason I thought not is that it would allow you to quickly (with the turn of a hex wrench) remove the mag...


It certainly does meet the legal standard. It takes a tool and a bit of time and mag can't be removed or replaced in normal course of rifle operation.

The standard is the definition in Calif Code of Regulation sec 978.20(a) See Article 2 at http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/regs/sb23.pdf :

'Detachable magazine' means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.


... versus something like the Vulcan lower that is pinned and glued in. Also, if someone like Vulcan has to have their lower approved by the DOJ as CA legal, how could you just go and get this product and just do it yourself?

The pinned and glued Vulcan is irreelevant here. Do please understand that Harrott decision makes any AR-style lower legal to possess (without pistol grip, etc. or with a fixed 10rd or less magazien) - as long as its make and model doesn't appear on the Kasler list (or in Calif Code of Regulation sec 979.11).

Vulcan could very well have sold their receivers with a 10rd nondetachable magazine much like what folks are doing here with other brands. They may not have had DOJ "approval" but lack of approval by a bureaucrat does not mean illegality!!


So, if it is not a viable option to make a CA legal lower using this product why would you even use it? What am I missing about this?

It is indeed a viable legal option for a non-Kasler off-list lower. You must have missed the last month and a half discussion about off-list legal lowers. You might get a bit of information from my FAQ on this website.

glock_this
01-07-2006, 3:24 PM
thanks for the clarification - can I take print this out and take it to court if I get busted for using the product :)

anyway, not so much that I 'missed' anything as it is very confusing (and I am not the only one who thinks so) when you do not actually study and disect it (like you do) as though you are preparing for a midterm. the code references and talk on the topic often comes across as hard to follow "bureaucratic" and often vague legal terminology (protrudes conspicuously, detachable, pinned, removed readily -- boy, a hex wrench makes anything about readily removable wouldn't you say) that is easy to scatter an average new rifle user like me who has not spent hours deciphering all of its nuiances and intentions.

"They may not have had DOJ "approval" but lack of approval by a bureaucrat does not mean illegality" this may be true, but maybe becuase they sought out 'bureaucratic' DOJ approval and got it, there is less likelyhood of future issues with them getting listed (or of you getting hasseled for your setup - as your FAQ stats "you may be subject to the whims of law enforcement") as you used a product put out by a company that followed a protocol and DOJ approved it.. versus the use of this maglock product which is not designed or sold (read their website descriptoin) to be intended to do what it is I was wondering it did and we are talking about.

That being said, I WILL go back and read you FAQ on the topic I read when I first signed on to this board as I would obviously fail a pop quiz on the topic. :)

TonyM
01-07-2006, 4:45 PM
"They may not have had DOJ "approval" but lack of approval by a bureaucrat does not mean illegality" this may be true, but maybe becuase they sought out 'bureaucratic' DOJ approval and got it, there is less likelyhood of future issues with them getting listed (or of you getting hasseled for your setup - as your FAQ stats "you may be subject to the whims of law enforcement") as you used a product put out by a company that followed a protocol and DOJ approved it..

Just because they asked the DOJ doesn't really mean much. They were just hoping to get the same letters that many of us got for unlisted lowers.

Even the letter I got with my Vulcans say the same thing about certain District Attorneys may view the "device" differently.

The DOJ doesn't press charges, and honestly, if a DA wants to press charges I bet the last thing on his mind is "did they get a letter?". I bet many of them don't know anything about the letters.

saki302
01-07-2006, 4:58 PM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..

"'Detachable magazine' means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine."

Why do I have visions of a side-feeding 'clip' which holds 50 rounds, and cycles sideways with each shot? :D
not that it would happen now that STANDARD-cap mags are legal federally, but one can dream....

-Dave

Shoot-it
01-11-2006, 6:56 PM
yes u got a good point glock so its not legal to change the mag with a bushy ten rounder i just got three in yesterday.:confused: :confused: :eek:

avidone
01-11-2006, 7:39 PM
[QUOTE=glock_this]versus the use of this maglock product which is not designed or sold (read their website descriptoin) to be intended to do what it is I was wondering it did and we are talking about.
QUOTE] :confused:

Their website states: The Range-Maglok AR-15 kit removes the detachable magazine feature of an AR style firearm and replaces it with a removable feature. :rolleyes: